Linux desktop environments: Difference between revisions

Revision as of 09:14, 28 August 2013

Revision as of 12:44, 9 September 2013

Line 13:

All Linux desktop applications use the [[X Window System]] and thus benefit from features like networking (remote display) and quick mouse-only [[cut, copy, and paste]]. Mouse selected text is automatically copied, and it can then be pasted using a middle click, without the need to resort to use of the keyboard.<ref name="About">{{cite web|url = http://linux.about.com/library/bl/open/newbie/blnewbie4.3.10.htm|title = Linux Newbie Administrator FAQ: X-Windows[sic]|accessdate = 2008-05-13|last = About, Inc|authorlink = |year = 2008}}</ref>

=== Components of the Linux Desktop ===

Line 26 ⟶ 25:

* Desktop shells, e.g. [[GNOME Shell]], [[Cinnamon (user interface)|Cinnamon]] or [[KDE Plasma Workspaces]]

* [[List of toolkits|Toolkits]] to write applications, e.g. [[Nautilus (file manager)|Nautilus]] or [[Dolphin (file manager)|Dolphin]] or [[Thunar]]

== Criticism ==

[[Ingo Molnár]] describes the core problem of the the Linux desktop being it not being free enough because it rather implements the Cathedral then the Bazaar approach (from ''[[The Cathedral and the Bazaar]]''): "Free software matters to developers and organizations primarily, but on the user side, the free code behind Linux desktops is immaterial if free software does not deliver benefits such as actual freedom of use": <ref name="molnar2012-1">{{cite web|url=https://plus.google.com/109922199462633401279/posts/HgdeFDfRzNe

|quote=''The basic failure of the free Linux desktop is that it's, perversely, not free enough. There's been a string of Linux desktop quality problems, specific incidents reported by +Linas Vepstas , +Jon Masters , +Linus Torvalds and others, and reading the related G+ discussions made me aware that many OSS developers don't realize what a deep hole we are in. The desktop Linux suckage we are seeing today - on basically all the major Linux distributions - are the final symptoms of mistakes made 10-20 years ago - the death cries of a platform. Desktop Linux distributions are trying to "own" 20 thousand application packages consisting of over a billion lines of code and have created parallel, mostly closed ecosystems around them. The typical update latency for an app is weeks for security fixes (sometimes months) and months (sometimes years) for major features. They are centrally planned, hierarchical organizations instead of distributed, democratic free societies.'' |first=Ingo |last=Molnar |date=2012-03-17 |title=Technology: What ails the Linux desktop? Part I. |accessdate=2012-06-16 |publisher=plus.google.com}}</ref>

<ref name="molnar2012">{{cite web|url=https://plus.google.com/109922199462633401279/posts/VSdDJnscewS |quote=''So, to fix desktop Linux we need a radically different software distribution model: less of a cathedral, more of a bazaar. [...] - totally flat package dependencies (i.e. a package update does not forcibly pull in other package updates) [...] - a guaranteed ABI platform going forward (once a package is installed it will never break or require forced updates again). Users want to be free of update pressure from the rest of the system, if they choose to.''|date=2012-03-17 |title=Technology: What ails the Linux desktop? Part II. |accessdate=2012-06-16 |publisher=plus.google.com |author=[[Ingo Molnar]]}}</ref>